# Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon



## nothing to see here (Jul 21, 2010)

*Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

Something I've noticed a lot of recently, though it's been around for years... where on Earth did people get the idea that the average Pokémon is _unimaginably_ stronger than the average human?

To show just how ridiculous it's gotten... recently I saw someone suggest that something as weak as an Eevee would be able to kill or mortally wound a normal human with a single attack.  Seriously, an _Eevee?_  You've got to be kidding me.

Yes, a decent fully-evolved Pokémon is probably going to be stronger than a normal human, and many of them would probably be able to kill a normal human.  And I'm sure that even a lot of unevolved Pokémon would be able to beat up some scrawny 10-year-old trainer who's never been in a fight in his life.  But why would anyone in their right mind seriously think that ANY Pokémon, even something small and relatively powerless, could easily beat up a full-grown adult?

It just doesn't make any sense, and it's not at all supported by the canon material (by which I mean the games; I'm not familiar enough with the manga to say much about it, and I can't stand the anime.)

In Gold/Silver/Crystal and the remakes, a guy working for Team Rocket is capable of surviving a Hyper Beam from Lance's Dragonite without even being seriously injured (though it did hurt quite a bit and immobilize him for a while.) At _point blank range._  He was thrown into the wall by this, but his body was tough enough to stop the whole blast... the wall behind him isn't even damaged afterward!

There's nothing that suggests the Dragonite was holding back, either.  If you want to hold back on the guy, why use Hyper Beam, one of the least holding-back attacks you can get? Why not just paralyze him with Thunder Wave, or hit him with a much weaker attack like Wrap or Dragon Rage?

They made him a Black Belt in HG/SS (I can't remember if he was originally or not), but still... he wasn't even knocked unconscious after a direct hit from one of the most powerful attacks there is, coming from a very strong Pokémon that had been trained by a very high-level trainer.  If it takes _that much_ power for a Dragonite to just immobilize one guy, what the hell could something like an Eevee do in that kind of situation?  Charge in for an attack only to get roundhouse-kicked face-first into a wall and then flop down unconscious? Yeah, probably something like that.

And then you have one of the myths in D/P/Pt, where a human gets a sword and goes around killing Pokémon in such massive amounts that it's actually causing problems.  I somehow doubt that this guy was only targeting weak Pokémon like Caterpies and Magikarps.

The Black Belt and the guy with the sword probably weren't really representative of what an _average_ human can do, of course... but Team Rocket grunts are.  Even the gruntiest of Rocket Grunts is capable of physically overpowering Slowpokes and cutting off their tails without being hurt in the process.  Yes, Slowpokes are slow, but you'd think that the other Slowpokes would at least _try_ fighting back after the first tail-cutting if they really were powerful enough to be a match for an average adult human.

Another of the Sinnoh myths outright states that humans kill and eat Pokémon.  Yeah, they also believe that the Pokémon will magically regrow if you toss their bones in a river, but the important part is this: humans are capable of killing and eating Pokémon, and not just weak ones either (for example, Tauros/Miltank--they do have burgers, after all.)
Several Pokédex entires even mention Laprases being hunted, to the point where they nearly went extinct.  A Lapras is a very large, very powerful, and very intelligent Pokémon... and on top of that, they live out in the ocean, so they're not even in a place where humans can get to them easily.  If humans can _frequently_ kill something as high up as a Lapras, why do so many people still think that far weaker Pokémon are more than a match for a human?

And finally, in the 1st-gen games, a bunch of Team Rocket grunts managed to kill a Marowak.  Considering that none of their Pokémon (mostly Poison-types) would really be much of a match for a Marowak and they don't appear to be armed with anything lethal, this would imply that even a strong Pokémon like Marowak can still be beaten (and even _killed_) by a bunch of average unarmed human thugs.


----------



## RespectTheBlade (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

If all pokemon were truly stronger than humans, then the whole world of pokemon would be pokemon-dominated.


----------



## 1. Luftballon (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

well, the grunts _did_ have whips. but.


----------



## Blastoise Fortooate (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

rhyperior = 10 men

wild, untrained eevee = little girl

pokemon = able to control their attacks' power levels


----------



## shadow_lugia (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

Well, I'm not sure about the Rocket Grunt, but that was probably just so there wouldn't be a huge splat of gorey violence all over a Pokemon game. However, another thing to take into consideration is _tools._ I'm pretty sure that most any living animal, human or Pokemon, would die if they got stabbed in the chest with a sword. Lapras could be hunted by harpoons, just like whales are in the real world.


----------



## Wargle (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

And think abput it. Does Lance _really_ want to kill someone.

And there are dex entries or Haunter and Shedinja stealing your soul, and Gengar just outright taking your life. And I doubt Gyarados's rampages go without a few casulaties either.

And then there's the fact that _logic_ proves a lot of Pokémon to ve able to kill us. COuld we really survive a Body Slam from a Snorlax? Meteor Mash from a Metagross? Dynamic Punch from a Machamp? Outrage from Rayquaza? Judgement from Arceus? Magma Storm from Heatran? I think not.

But stuff like an Eevee couldn't do much. Maybe like, lick us to death. Kill us off with its sheer cuteness.


----------



## Yarnchu (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

Ignoring the Pokedex for a moment(because it's hard to seperate what's fact and what's exageration)....

Aren't several Black Belts and other assorted trainers(including Chuck) mentioned to be sparing with their Pokemon? Chuck might not be a fair example, but he was shown to be completely capable of lifting a large bolder and even shattering it, proving that with proper training humans can reach similar levels of strength to Pokemon. Then you have the Team Rocket guy mentioned above(Lance probably would've used a weaker attack if he wanted to hold back on the guy), Red having somehow climbed up Mt. Silver without Rock Climb, and probably how people in general would've had to fight off Pokemon before various tools were made to keep them in line. So, physically, I'd say it is very much possible to reach a similar level of strength as some Pokemon, but you'd still be over powered if one used its superior abilities(by virtue of having access to attacks like Hyper Beam and Body Slam).


----------



## @lex (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

When it comes to hunting, there's nothing that tells us that people don't use Pokémon of their own to hunt wild Pokémon. And it's certainly possibe that they're breeding Pokémon for food.

On the other hand, there's that rumor that Magnus defeated a Machamp in arm wrestling.

Still, it's entirely understandable why we'd say Pokémon are so powerful. I mean, they're creatures that can cause tremendous local earthquakes, tidal waves and thunderstorms.


----------



## nothing to see here (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

Wow... I somehow completely forgot about all the mentions of Fighting-type trainers sparring and/or lifting weights with their Pokémon (and Magnus vs. Machamp in arm-wrestling, heh.)  Even more evidence for Pokémon not being ludicrously powerful compared to humans!



> pokemon = able to control their attacks' power levels


Is there really any evidence for this?

I mean, I'm sure it's possible for them to hold back (just like anyone can hold back some of their strength) when using a lot of attacks, but... Hyper Beam? The whole point of Hyper Beam is _not_ holding back, that's why it wears you out so much that you need to recharge afterward.



> And think about it. Does Lance really want to kill someone.


Well, the guy was a member of a criminal gang that has killed and maimed Pokémon in the past, and Lance did come from a dragon trainer clan that puts a very high value on treating Pokémon well... if Lance _did_ want to kill him, it wouldn't really be out-of-character.

Besides, if Lance really wanted his Dragonite to hold back (or thought his Dragonite would outright kill somebody if it _didn't_ hold back), he wouldn't have given the command to use _Hyper Beam_ rather than some other attack.



> Still, it's entirely understandable why we'd say Pokémon are so powerful. I mean, they're creatures that can cause tremendous local earthquakes, tidal waves and thunderstorms.


Yeah, this is part of the reason why I brought up Hyper Beam vs. Black Belt.  Sure, the attacks _sound_ impressive if you just look at the names (like Earthquake or Magma Storm) or the attack animation, but how powerful are they _really?_

I doubt any Pokémon's Earthquake attack is anywhere near as powerful as a real, city-destroying, 7-or-8-on-the-Richter-scale earthquake.  I usually picture the Earthquake attack as more of a ground-level shockwave that will knock you down pretty hard if you're within 20 feet or so of the Pokémon that uses it, but doesn't go deep enough to cause any structural damage to the area unless the battle's taking place on really unstable ground to begin with.  Of course, freshly-dug tunnels in the dirt just a few feet below ground are going to be pretty unstable, so it hits (and does more damage to) things using Dig.

Of course, ridiculously powerful Pokémon like Rhyperior or Groudon would probably be able to destroy buildings and such with Earthquakes... but even for them, it'd take hours of Godzilla-style rampaging to actually destroy a whole city like a real earthquake does.


----------



## Mustardear (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*



El Garbanzo said:


> Well, the guy was a member of a criminal gang that has killed and maimed Pokémon in the past, and Lance did come from a dragon trainer clan that puts a very high value on treating Pokémon well... if Lance _did_ want to kill him, it wouldn't really be out-of-character.
> 
> Besides, if Lance really wanted his Dragonite to hold back (or thought his Dragonite would outright kill somebody if it _didn't_ hold back), he wouldn't have given the command to use _Hyper Beam_ rather than some other attack.


Maybe it only knows Hyper Beam? :sweatdrop: But still, we're talking about _killing_ someone here. Let's not forget Lance is the champion of the Elite 4, who are the most powerful trainers in the region. Lance would be a celebrity icon. If a celebrity killed someone in our world then there would be scandal! Of course the Pokemon world is not the same as our world but it's not wildly different either. Lance isn't an idiot - he wouldn't kill someone insignificant just for revenge. If he killed anyone it would be the boss or one of the executives, not 'random blackbelt'.


----------



## Music Dragon (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

If an Eevee can knock a Pikachu unconscious by tackling it a few times, why not a human?

(I distinctly remember this happening last time I played Yellow.)


----------



## Mustardear (Jul 21, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*



Music Dragon said:


> If an Eevee can knock a Pikachu unconscious by tackling it a few times, why not a human?
> 
> (I distinctly remember this happening last time I played Yellow.)


I think the phrase used was "kill or mortally wound a human in a single attack" which even I agree would be ridiculous. Still, it is unclear exactly how levels affect the Pokemon's strength - a Level 100 Eevee would deal massive damage with Bite if the attack stat of a Pokemon is a direct measure of how strong it is (this would make it more than 20 times as powerful as when it first hatched...)


----------



## nothing to see here (Jul 22, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*



> If an Eevee can knock a Pikachu unconscious by tackling it a few times, why not a human?


A human can knock another human out by punching them in the head a few times, but trying the same thing against an elephant or a rhino would most likely get you pretty seriously hurt.



> Maybe it only knows Hyper Beam?


Heh, that'd be pretty ridiculous. XD

I'm not 100% sure what moves Lance's Dragonite's actually had, but I seem to remember at least one of Lance's Dragonites knows Thunder Wave when you fight him later... though I may be mixing them up with Clair's Dragonair(s).  They also have Blizzard/Thunder/Fire Blast (one elemental attack for each) and Outrage, I think.



> But still, we're talking about killing someone here. Let's not forget Lance is the champion of the Elite 4, who are the most powerful trainers in the region. Lance would be a celebrity icon. If a celebrity killed someone in our world then there would be scandal! Of course the Pokemon world is not the same as our world but it's not wildly different either. Lance isn't an idiot - he wouldn't kill someone insignificant just for revenge. If he killed anyone it would be the boss or one of the executives, not 'random blackbelt'.


True, Lance probably wouldn't go out of his way to kill lower-ranking Rockets, and he'd probably avoid doing so if possible.

Which is probably why the Black Belt is the only guy Lance's Dragonite actually attacks.  If he had Hyper Beamed an average grunt with no significant fighting ability, they probably would end up dead... but instead, Lance went after the guy who could actually survive that attack.  Probably for two reasons: to get the strong guy out of the way without an extended battle that would alert the other grunts, and to scare the other guy (who just gives up without a fight) into not trying anything.



> Still, it is unclear exactly how levels affect the Pokemon's strength - a Level 100 Eevee would deal massive damage with Bite if the attack stat of a Pokemon is a direct measure of how strong it is (this would make it more than 20 times as powerful as when it first hatched...)


As much as I prefer the games over pretty much every other Pokémon-related thing (that I've seen much of), I'd have to say that stats and levels are probably more of a game mechanic than anything else.

Base stats are probably a pretty good gauge of how strong any given Pokémon is in different areas (compared to other Pokémon), and in general a Pokémon with more experience or training (higher level) is going to be tougher than a similar Pokémon with less experience or training... but there probably isn't such a simple "do the math" way to figure out a Pokémon's exact level of power.  A well-trained Pokémon would definitely be more powerful than some newbie trainer's untrained starter or a wild Pidgey, but even a really high leveled Eevee is still an Eevee.  The difference between "Untrained Starter" Eevee and "After Beating Several Gym Leaders" Eevee would be more like... a bite from a kitten vs. a bite from a small dog with strong jaws, rather than something really massive.  Of course, the "small dog" bite _would_ hurt a lot and possibly cause some real injury, but it still wouldn't be anywhere near lethal.  Unless maybe the Eevee was rabid or something, heh.

Of course, a trained-to-the-max Pokémon probably _would_ be more than 20 times more powerful than a freshly-hatched one.  But that's not really all that impressive when you consider that a freshly-hatched baby should either be very weak or completely helpless, depending on its species.


----------



## Thorne (Jul 22, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

To be honest, I think that caught Pokémon are more or less pacifistic against humans. I mean, if there isn't something that affects their behaviour, there is really nothing that prevents them from running away when you send them out, or attacking other trainers like they do in the wild. It'd seem rather unorthodox to hurt someone for no real reason, right? That's what I'd say Lance's Dragonite had to do. If you had to punch someone you were a lot stronger than, would you use all your strength?

This nothing but a bit of speculation on my part, but still.


----------



## Shadow Serenity (Jul 22, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*



El Garbanzo said:


> Is there really any evidence for this?


If my fuzzy memory serves me, there was an episode of the anime, first season, where Ash's Pikachu and Squirtle downsized the power of their attacks to help train someone's Paras.

...Granted, it didn't really seem to make any difference, but it was supposed to be implied that that Paras was unusually weak anyway, so...

Edit: My own personal assumption is that the programmers simply wanted to show how strong Lance and his pokemon were by issuing a Hyper Beam rather than some "common" attack, and didn't really factor in the chance of killing the person targeted.


----------



## ultraviolet (Jul 22, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

The fact that Lance has underleveled dragonites in his E4 team makes me think that the dragonite he used then was probably pretty low-leveled.

and honestly who even needs more than one dragonite, let alone three underleveled ones? guy's got some issues, man.


----------



## Wargle (Jul 22, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*



Shadow Serenity said:


> If my fuzzy memory serves me, there was an episode of the anime, first season, where Ash's Pikachu and Squirtle downsized the power of their attacks to help train someone's Paras.


You are correct. It was in the original Anime and Para's debut.

And the Magnus v Machamp thing is a myth. Think of it like people telling all those Chuck Norris jokes. He can't actually punch through the Earth, or take a shotgun blast without bleeding, or withstand 20 the lethal dose of poison for an Elephant and just be powered down slightly. That's just what people say, as they idolize him. Or something.

Magnus is the Chuck Norris of the Pokémon world.


----------



## Music Dragon (Jul 22, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*



Mustardear said:


> I think the phrase used was "kill or mortally wound a human in a single attack" which even I agree would be ridiculous.


All right, then think of Eevee as one of those really small, really angry bulldogs that go straight for the jugular. Problem solved! It'd look a bit like the scene with the Killer Rabbit of Caerbannog in Monty Python and the Holy Grail.


----------



## nothing to see here (Jul 22, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*



> All right, then think of Eevee as one of those really small, really angry bulldogs that go straight for the jugular. Problem solved! It'd look a bit like the scene with the Killer Rabbit of Caerbannog in Monty Python and the Holy Grail.


Maybe if it was some kind of killer mutant super-Eevee.  With big, pointy teeth.

Level 255 Eevees off the coast of Cinnabar Island from the Missingno glitch, maybe?



> If my fuzzy memory serves me, there was an episode of the anime, first season, where Ash's Pikachu and Squirtle downsized the power of their attacks to help train someone's Paras.
> 
> ...Granted, it didn't really seem to make any difference, but it was supposed to be implied that that Paras was unusually weak anyway, so...


Hmm... I generally don't count the anime when figuring out how Pokémon stuff works, since it's completely separate from the game universe and all. (and also because I don't like it, but mainly because of the two-different-universes-so-they-probably-don't-work-the-same-way thing.)

But I'm guessing some attacks (like Water Gun or Thundershock) probably _would_ be able to be toned down, just because of how the attacks work.  Water Gun is basically just a much weaker but more accurate Hydro Pump anyway, and Thundershock's barely any different from a weak Thunderbolt, so I can't see any reason why a Pokémon _wouldn't_ be able to cut the water/electricity flow down even lower if they needed to.  I mean, I'm sure some trainers use Water-types to water their plants and such, and most plants are just too fragile for a Blastoise to be blasting them with huge sprays of water like a fire hose.

Some attacks just don't seem like they'd work that way, though... I'd imagine that Dynamicpunch would just become Regular Everyday Punch if you tried to tone it down very far below its normal level, and the whole point of moves like Overheat and Hyper Beam is that you pump so much power into them that it weakens you or you have to recharge afterward.



> The fact that Lance has underleveled dragonites in his E4 team makes me think that the dragonite he used then was probably pretty low-leveled.


It's level 40, going by HG/SS, which is _insanely high_ for that point in the game.

And I'm guessing the only reason it's that low is so that the double battle with Ariana and the random grunt wouldn't be _completely_ unbalanced by the Dragonite being there.


----------



## Anomaly 54 (Jul 22, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

But it was, Dragonite's Fly OHKO'd all the opponents Pokémon and all I did was keep swapping. Insta exp, free of charge.

I think that Humans would be relitivly strong against some Pokémon (Caterpie, Eevee, Rattata, Sentret, ect), but I think that the ability to KO Pokémon would probably stop when they come to some Pokémon with huge strength (Machop, Geodude) or Pokémon with the ability to kill/cripple someone from range (Electabuzz's Thunderbolt, Jynx's Blizzard, Magmar's Fire Blast, Dragonite's Hyper Beam for example)


----------



## Chief Zackrai (Jul 23, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

there are pokemon that humans are definitely more powerful than. However, when you reach a pokemon like Charizard, you're not going to stand a chance.

And Brock, if you go by the manga, then, yes. Lance would love to kill someone. A lot of people, for that matter. He, Agatha, Lerelei, and not so much Bruno were evil to begin with. Lance wanted to make a new world order. *coughCyruscough* He was going to use Lugia to destroy mankind. (well, i think it was Lugia he was trying to use-you never actually saw it, and they never named it, really.)


----------



## Music Dragon (Jul 23, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

So why are you not allowed to walk in the tall grass full of pigeons and caterpillars without a fire-breathing lizard for protection?


----------



## Lili (Jul 23, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

Because the person blocking your way is retarded and/or sometimes a small child who doesn't know any better or has paranoid parents or a really paranoid person.


----------



## Green (Jul 23, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

what if all those caterpillars gang up on you? then what? or if one of those pigeons poops in your eye?


----------



## Chief Zackrai (Jul 23, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

exactly. have you ever been ambushed by a stray pack of caterpillars? It's _not_ pretty. and getting the smell of bird poop out of your eyeball is murder.


----------



## Superbird (Jul 24, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

Hyper beam could be the only attack of its kind  that dragonite knows,  and is the one that could be toned down the most. Maybe the way it used it, it didn't have to recharge afterward?


----------



## nothing to see here (Jul 24, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

That's the thing, though... Hyper Beam just doesn't seem like an attack that _can_ be toned down.  And even if it can, it certainly wouldn't be able to go as low as other attacks.  It just wouldn't be a Hyper Beam if it wasn't pushing the Pokémon's power as far as it can go, or even beyond the normal limit (hence the "hyper" in the name.)

And the Dragonite didn't really do anything else for a while after the attack, it just followed Lance down the stairs... so there's no indication that it was some kind of special low-power Hyper Beam with no recharge time, if that's even possible.  Walking down the stairs doesn't mean it wasn't recharging, since the recharge apparently doesn't completely prevent the Pokémon from moving (they can still avoid attacks during that turn... they just can't gather up enough energy to pull off any attacks of their own.)

Plus, the Dragonite apparently knows Fly in HG/SS.  So if it wanted to just get rid of the Black Belt without the risk of using a more powerful move, why not just grab the guy, fly up to Lake of Rage to dunk him, and then come back?


----------



## shadow_lugia (Jul 24, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*



Music Dragon said:


> So why are you not allowed to walk in the tall grass full of pigeons and caterpillars without a fire-breathing lizard for protection?


It's actually the freaking rodents that are running around all over the goddamn place. They bite you once and you get rabies or they mentally scar you with there derpness.


----------



## Superbird (Jul 24, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

Wait, weren't they inside? In that case, Fly couldn't have been used. But I dunno, maybe someone should get Butterfree to write an essay about it.


----------



## Enkoe (Jul 24, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

Yeah, it puzzles me how the Black Belt survived Dragonite's Hyper Beam... then again, Team  Rocket keep surviving Pikachu's thunderbolts and they survive, don't they? I just think that normal Pokemon (including pseudo-legends) do a lot of damage but not too much, and legendaries have almost deadly attacks.

Of course, comparing a game thing to an anime thing is a little strange, but still... the anime isn't so different, I guess. (I know all the type tidbits and such)


----------



## nothing to see here (Jul 25, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*



> Wait, weren't they inside? In that case, Fly couldn't have been used.


The building has a door.  All it'd take is to drag the guy outside the door and _then_ fly him off somewhere.  Just Hyper Beam'ing him into a wall is probably quicker, though.



> then again, Team Rocket keep surviving Pikachu's thunderbolts and they survive, don't they?


Tasers/stun-guns hurt like hell, usually knock you over, and stun you... but they're almost never lethal unless you have something like a pre-existing heart condition or a pacemaker that the electricity can interfere with.  It's not too surprising that electric attacks, which never seem to do anything worse than knock another Pokémon unconscious or give them a few minor surface burns, would almost always be non-lethal.

That's like, the one thing the anime actually did realistically. XD  If you ignore the whole randomly-flying-off-into-the-distance thing, anyway.



> I just think that normal Pokemon (including pseudo-legends) do a lot of damage but not too much, and legendaries have almost deadly attacks.


Exactly how deadly they are probably depends on the legendary... I can't really picture something like Cresselia killing anybody, with its not-so-high attack stats and mostly healing-based powers.  And what would a newly-hatched baby Manaphy or Phione be able to do? Not a whole lot, I'm guessing.

But yeah, legendaries are usually much higher leveled than other wild Pokémon... so, in non-game-mechanics terms, they're either freakishly strong mutants, or they're older and more experienced, or they actually go out of their way to train themselves rather than just gaining strength slowly as they grow.  And they don't seem to be as used to having humans around either... put those two together, and they probably would be a lot be more likely to actually kill someone than most Pokémon would.  If their attacks could be toned down, they probably wouldn't do it anyway, because they'd be so used to fighting other powerful things (other legendaries and other higher-leveled Pokémon, or Pokémon belonging to strong trainers trying to catch them) that would be able to beat them up if they held back.

I think something like a Metagross or Tyranitar would generally be more powerful than a lot of the weaker legendaries (like Articuno/Zapdos/Moltres, Raikou/Entei/Suicune, the Regis minus Gigas, Mew, etc.) that aren't really anything more than just a rare and stronger-than-average species, though... just because the rare exceptions like Dialga/Palkia/Giratina, Arceus, and Mewtwo are way beyond the level of other Pokémon doesn't mean that _all_ legendaries should be that high up there in power.



> It's actually the freaking rodents that are running around all over the goddamn place. They bite you once and you get rabies or they mentally scar you with there derpness.


Bringing up the rodents actually reminds me of something... people in real life are often afraid of tiny weak things even though they can't actually hurt them in any significant way (unless you happen to be one of the extra unlucky people who just _happens_ to get bit by the rabid one), so why wouldn't people in the Pokémon world be the same way?

I mean, why else would Professor Birch be afraid of some random level 3 Zigzagoon or Poochyena that shows up? They're small, weak Pokémon that only have weak moves like Tackle at that point, so there's no way that _one_ of them would be any real threat to a healthy adult human's life, not even in Super Exaggeration Land where a somewhat-trained Eevee can kill you easily.

He's just afraid of them in the same way that a lot of humans are afraid of mice or snakes or bats: stupid irrational fear, probably picked up from several generations of relatives with the same stupid irrational fear, with an extra layer of fear of disease/poison plopped ontop of it to make it even worse.  Even though all it'd really take to scare one off--or even knock one out-- would be to kick at it a couple times instead of running away.


----------



## Music Dragon (Jul 25, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

Actually, I heard from this guy who heard from this other guy that hyenas are pretty dangerous.


----------



## Superbird (Jul 25, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

On the mightyena thing, Music Dragon, this may be useful.


----------



## 1. Luftballon (Jul 25, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

WHOOSH!


----------



## Wargle (Jul 25, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

If Rhydon is capable of crushing diamonds with its horn, imagine what it could do to a human skull.


----------



## RespectTheBlade (Jul 25, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

a Metang can bring down a jet by standing (er,floating) in front of it. And Nidoking can snap telephone poles like toothpicks.


----------



## nothing to see here (Jul 25, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

Diamonds are actually pretty fragile.  It doesn't take a whole lot of blunt/crushing force to damage them.  _Scratching_ diamonds would be more impressive, but...

Anyway, you can't really take the Pokédex entries as fact, since they're extremely inconsistent and a lot of them are exaggerated to the point of ridiculousness.  One moment they're making some Pokémon sound so amazingly dumb that it's surprising they didn't go extinct (Rhyhorn/Linoone being completely unable to change direction in mid-run) or making them sound even weaker than the wimpiest real-life fish (Magikarp being unable to swim against even a weak current) or talking about a Pokémon making a pro wrestler sick with its poison as if this is supposed to be something impressive, and then after that they're trying to turn even the weakest Pokémon into some kind of superheroes.

And sometimes they even exaggerate in _both_ directions for _the same Pokémon!_  There is just no way that a Magikarp can be so weak that it can't swim against a slow current _and_ so powerful that it can jump over an entire mountain with Splash.



> Actually, I heard from this guy who heard from this other guy that hyenas are pretty dangerous.


Adult hyenas, sure.  Foot-long baby ones, not so much.

A Mightyena probably _would_ be dangerous... but a level 3 Poochyena would be just as harmless as you'd expect a foot-long sorta-puppy-like thing to be.  A Poochyena would pretty much the same situation as the Eevee: if low-leveled, it'd be weak and essentially harmless; if high-leveled, it'd be like a small dog with very strong jaws.


----------



## Pwnemon (Jul 26, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

A little off topic, I know, but I think I know why someone would assume something like that. They probably thought, "If humans could overpower Pokemon, why do they hide behind them instead of going out and punching each other themselves?" To which I have two answers:

1) "It's something for sport. Why do you think they give money to the winner? It would be sort of the equivalent of a dog fight, but instead of being Barbaric, barbaric, barbaric, everyone loves it and the government is decided by who is better at Pokemon battling."

2) "It's a video game, stupid. Stop overthinking it."


----------



## nothing to see here (Jul 26, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*



> A little off topic, I know, but I think I know why someone would assume something like that.


The question that started this thread is "why do some people assume that Pokémon are so much stronger than humans no matter what, even when it doesn't make any sense for them to be stronger?"  An opinion on the reasons why people look at it that way is about as on-topic as you can get!



> They probably thought, "If humans could overpower Pokemon, why do they hide behind them instead of going out and punching each other themselves?" To which I have two answers:
> 
> 1) "It's something for sport. Why do you think they give money to the winner? It would be sort of the equivalent of a dog fight, but instead of being Barbaric, barbaric, barbaric, everyone loves it and the government is decided by who is better at Pokemon battling."
> 
> 2) "It's a video game, stupid. Stop overthinking it."


Yeah, I'd say the answer to the "why don't humans beat each other up instead of using Pokémon?" thing is a little bit of both of those.

With most trainers, it's option #1; they're not having Pokémon fights just for the sake of getting into a fight (except maybe the Bikers and other violent-seeming guys)... they're doing it for fun, to strengthen the bonds with their own Pokémon by working together, and to prove that their Pokémon are tougher than the other guy's.  And the technology for healing Pokémon seems to have advanced _far_ beyond the technology for healing injured humans... so it'd be easier to fix things up if a Pokémon actually got seriously hurt, compared to how much trouble it'd be if one of the trainers did.

With Team Rocket and such, it's more of option #2, because realistically they _would_ attack the kid instead of just giving up after all of their Pokémon are knocked out... they just didn't want to put in a whole new set of game mechanics for directly fighting a trainer instead of just their Pokémon.  Plus it's a game series mostly targeted toward kids, and the overprotective parents would probably whine about it if their kids could make a Gyarados or Steelix attack regular, unarmed humans... even if they are gang members.


----------



## Wargle (Jul 27, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

Linoone isn't dumb. It can't change directions easily because of the way it runs. I thin we can all agree a crocdile in real life is NOT dumb at all. It is ((one of for some people)) the craftiest and most intelligent predators alive. Yet when it runs it can't make a 90 degree turn on a dime. That has nothing to do with brain power. It is because of its stubby legs and the way they are positioned.

Linoone's legs are somewhat stubby like a crocodillian's so it can't turn easily either.

And Magikarp MUST swim against a current. I don't know entry says it can't but several say it is strong enough it can and that is how it evolves.


----------



## RespectTheBlade (Jul 27, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*



Brock said:


> And Magikarp MUST swim against a current. I don't know entry says it can't but several say it is strong enough it can and that is how it evolves.


Like wise, Even if a magikarp CAN power it's way against a cuurent, there is no way that it could leap over a mountain (even if it does know Bounce.)


----------



## thunder (Jul 28, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

I have some explanations:
1) Trained pokemon are said to be restrained by pokeballs, this explains things like lance's dragonite hyper beaming the grunt,
2) The people telling you to aviod the grass is like how most people wouldn't like to have a fist fight with a dog or giant rat etc.
3) Pokemon are shown to heal easily some even managing without help and with pokecenters healing anything instantly.


----------



## nothing to see here (Jul 29, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*



> Linoone isn't dumb. It can't change directions easily because of the way it runs. I thin we can all agree a crocdile in real life is NOT dumb at all. It is ((one of for some people)) the craftiest and most intelligent predators alive. Yet when it runs it can't make a 90 degree turn on a dime. That has nothing to do with brain power. It is because of its stubby legs and the way they are positioned.


Yeah, it's mostly Rhyhorn that gets the "so dumb it can't turn" treatment by the Pokédex; the Linoone entry says nothing about intelligence, just that it can't turn.  I'm guessing the reality is more like "can't turn _very well_ when running at full speed," and it just got exaggerated (like many Pokédex entries are.)

It does seem a bit silly that Linoone isn't good at turning even though Zigzagoon is _specifically_ noted for running in a zig-zag pattern, though... evolved Pokémon should be _more_ capable than their unevolved forms, unless there's a really good reason for them to be worse at something (like, say, a Gyarados hiding... a Magikarp would be way better at that simply because it's actually small enough to fit behind/inside things. XD)



> And Magikarp MUST swim against a current. I don't know entry says it can't but several say it is strong enough it can and that is how it evolves.


That's exactly my point: the Pokédex is unreliable and contradicts itself all the time.  A Pokédex entry (Pearl version to be specific) says they can't swim against currents, even really weak ones... but if Magikarps couldn't swim against a current, you'd never find them in rivers or near waterfalls (which is exactly where you usually find a ton of them.)



> 1) Trained pokemon are said to be restrained by pokeballs, this explains things like lance's dragonite hyper beaming the grunt,


This is only said once, as far as I can remember, and only in reference to Dialga and Palkia (which are both quite a bit more powerful than your average Dragonite; the rules on how Pokémon on that level work are most likely special cases, rather than something that can be applied to everything else.)

And even in that case, it seems more like the issue was "a Poké Ball won't guarantee that I can actually use Dialga/Palkia's powers" rather than "if I catch them in a Poké Ball, their powers will be limited."  The Red Chain was pretty much _forcing_ them to use their powers, to the point where Dialga/Palkia wanted Lucas/Dawn to catch them or even knock them unconscious just to stop it because they _couldn't_ prevent themselves from doing it.
It might have even been forcing them to overexert themselves (I seem to remember a line in that scene about Dialga/Palkia looking as if they were in pain) and push their time/space powers far beyond their limits in an attempt to do something that would normally be impossible for them, considering that Mewtwo is on the same level as Dialga and Palkia stats-wise (and _more powerful_ in Special Attack specifically) and yet he barely even managed to destroy a single building.  And he was actually _trying_ to hurt people to get back at them for torturing and experimenting on him his entire life... so I doubt he'd be holding back.

The Red Chain is pretty much mind control (only worse, because you're still aware of what you're doing and that you don't want to do it.)  Poké Balls, on the other hand, aren't guaranteed to make a powerful Pokémon listen to your orders, especially if they don't respect you (represented in the game mechanics by high-leveled Pokémon slacking off or going to sleep instead of fighting for you if you don't have enough badges yet.)

If there is a limiter, it doesn't really make sense that the same would apply to _all_ Pokémon.  It's been said even as far back as R/B/Y and G/S/C that wild Pokémon are usually weaker than trained Pokémon, that freshly-caught Pokémon are weaker than those that trainers have been with for a while (though that one could be taken either way), and that it's the combination of the trainer and the Pokémon working together that makes Champion-level Pokémon so powerful compared to the usual for their species.

And if there is an actual power-limiting mechanism in the Poké Balls, it's probably only there to prevent things like Kyogre's rain-inducing powers from becoming active even when they're _inside_ a Poké Ball.  In that case, it most likely wouldn't even turn on if the Poké Ball contained anything below Kyogre/Groudon/Regigigas-level, because limiting the power of a Caterpie is just silly.


----------



## RespectTheBlade (Jul 29, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*



El Garbanzo said:


> And if there is an actual power-limiting mechanism in the Poké Balls, it's probably only there to prevent things like Kyogre's rain-inducing powers from becoming active even when they're _inside_ a Poké Ball.  In that case, it most likely wouldn't even turn on if the Poké Ball contained anything below Kyogre/Groudon/Regigigas-level, because limiting the power of a Caterpie is just silly.


or perhaps there is a power limiter in ultra balls and up. (almost nobody I know would catch a caterpie in an ultra ball.)


----------



## EmeraldCityBlues (Jul 29, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

People are scrawny bags of meat and bone. A Charizard, Salmence or Nidoking, something like that, would easily be able to kill a good amount of people before being gunned down by police or military or whoever controls rabid pokemon attacks in this weird poke-world. But an Eevee? An eevee is just a weak little mammal that can do a few tricks. You could probably stop it with a single kick. Then again, if you're the kind of soulless bastard who would KICK AN EEVEE, you should probably be locked up.


----------



## Vipera Magnifica (Jul 30, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

Well there's another thing... about 95% of trainers have weak Pokemon that humans could easily dominate. The stronger pokemon that are rather uncommon have trainers that know how to control them.

And as for guns, couldn't they kill just about every Pokemon save a few steel/rock/ghost types?


----------



## Wargle (Jul 30, 2010)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*



Zangviper said:


> And as for guns, couldn't they kill just about every Pokemon save a few steel/rock/ghost types?


But then they get banned from the Anime forever hurr durr.


----------



## Coroxn (Jun 16, 2011)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

Evee could totally take down an average human being. Think about it, it could Sand-Attack the guy, leaving him totally blind, then it could Take Down him in the groin, when he's on the ground it could Growl, and finally hit him with Last Resort-right in the throat.

So yeah. I think it could kill him.


----------



## Zero Moment (Jun 16, 2011)

*Re: Relative strength of humans vs. Pokémon*

...Why are you bumping a 10-month-old thread?


----------

